STATE OF A.P. Vs. DUDEKALA NAGENDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by the State, assailing the judgment of the VI Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Anantapur at Gooty in S.C.No.37 of 2010 dtd. 29/1/2011 acquitting the accused for the offence punishable under Ss. 498A and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Succinctly, the facts are as follows: The deceased was given in marriage to the accused with a dowry of Rs.1,00,000.00 and gold ornaments weighing 8 tulas. After marriage the deceased went to her husband's house at Abdullapuram village and started living with him. A male child was born out of the wedlock. About three years prior to the offence, the accused shifted his residence to Tadipatri to eke out his livelihood. The accused demanded the deceased to get money to purchase an auto. The deceased placed the same before her parents. L.W.2, who is the mother of the deceased, sold her gold jewels and gave Rs.20,000.00 to the accused. With the said money and loan from a finance company, the accused purchased an auto and he was plying the auto. But the accused defaulted payment of loan instalments and whenever he was short of money, he used to harass the deceased to bring money from her parents. Once the deceased brought Rs.15,000.00 from her parents and gave it to the accused and on another occasion, she brought Rs.10,000.00 from her parents and gave to the accused. But the accused did not stop harassing the deceased for more money. About one week prior to the date of offence, the accused sent the deceased to her parents, to get Rs.10,000.00. The deceased went to her parents and told them about the cruel treatment meted out to her and demanded for Rs.10,000.00. Her parents sent the deceased back, advising to adjust with her husband. On 12/11/2009, the mother of the deceased went to the house of the accused and found him lying. She gave him Rs.10,000.00 and advised him to work and earn money, instead of being lazy. The accused got offended and picked up a quarrel with the deceased and at about 2 PM, the accused poured kerosene on the deceased and set her on fire. On hearing the cries of the deceased, L.Ws.4 and 5 rushed to scene and saw the accused running away. They put off the fire. L.W.4 informed L.Ws.1 and 2 about the same. L.Ws.1 and 2 rushed to the scene and took the deceased to Government Hospital and admitted her in the hospital. On receiving medical admit intimation, L.W.14 went to the hospital and recorded the statement of the deceased. Based on it a case was registered in Cr.No.196 of 2009, for the offence under Sec. 498-A and 307 IPC. L.W.14 visited the Government Hospital, Tadipatri and examined the deceased and recorded her statement. On medical advice, the deceased was taken in an Ambulance to a hospital at Kurnool, but on the way, she succumbed to the injuries. The dead body of the deceased was brought back to the Government Hospital, Tadipatri and on receiving the death intimation, L.W.14 altered the Sec. of law to 498-A, 302 or 304-B IPC. The statement of the deceased was recorded by L.W.10 also when she was alive, on a requisition from L.W.14. After the death of the deceased, the dead body was subjected to post mortem examination and inquest. The statements of the witnesses were recorded and after collecting all the reports and after concluding the investigation, charge sheet was laid against the accused for the same offences. On appearance of the accused, the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Gooty took cognizance of the case under Ss. 498-A and 302 IPC and after complying with the legal formalities and as the case is exclusively triable by a Court of Sessions, committed the case to the Sessions Division, Anantapur District by virtue of orders in PRC.No.4 of 2009. The learned Sessions Judge, in turn, made over the case to the Court of VI Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Anantapur at Gooty for trial and disposal in accordance with law. On appearance of the accused before the Court below, the charges referred to above came to be framed. They were read over to the accused, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. During trial, in support of its case, the prosecution examined P.Ws.1 to 12 and got marked Exs.P1 to P19 and M.Os.1 and 6. After completion of the prosecution evidence, the accused was questioned about the incriminating circumstances appearing in the prosecution evidence, when he was examined under Sec. 313 Cr.P.C., he denied truth in the prosecution evidence and reported no evidence on her behalf. Ex.D1 is the portion in the statement of P.W.1.

(3.) The Court below, after considering the evidence and the material on record, passed the impugned judgment against which the present appeal is preferred on the following grounds: The Court below ought to have seen that the ingredients to constitute offences punishable under Ss. 498-A and 302 IPC are made out by the prosecution and it erred in coming to the conclusion with regard to Exs.P5 and P16, that the deceased with 90% burn injuries would not have made such an elaborate statement, whereas the evidence of P.W.8, doctor, and Ex.P10 endorsement show that the deceased was in a fit condition to give statement. Based on the above, the State seeks this Court to set aside the judgment of the Court below.